As you can see, although many biofuels do result in lower greenhouse gas emissions than either gasoline or diesel fuel as mixed in Switzerland (palm oil in Malaysia being a notable exception, as many studies have documented), and they all result in significantly lower ozone depletion, on every other factor looked at in the study biofuels are at best no better than petroleum and in many cases having greater than 167% worse environmental impact on multiple serious criteria such as creation of ocean dead zones, water pollution, land use change, and resource depletion.

Biofuels from deforested areas usually emit more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels. This also applies to indirect land usage changes if existing agricultural land is used for the first time for biofuel production and, as a consequence, forested areas have to be cleared in order to maintain the existing foodstuff or animal feed production.

On the other hand, positive effects can be achieved if energy plant cultivation increases the carbon content of the soil, for example via the cultivation of oil palms on unused grazing land in Columbia or via jatropha plantations in India and eastern Africa, making deserted land arable again. "Despite this, you can't speak in general terms of Jatropha as being a 'wonder plant', as its ecobalance is very much dependent on the agricultural practices at the site in question and the land's previous use," says Zah. Each (new) biofuel must therefore be examined separately and in detail.

Most Biofuels Better Than Oil For Greenhouse Gases, Worse or Similar Eco-Impact Otherwise: New Study

A new Swiss assessment of the environmental impact of biofuels shows that they are actually worse than oil on a variety of important criteria, such as contributing to ocean dead zones and resource depletion.